Why Is Crito Unjust

“Crito”, one of Plato’s dialogues, is based on a conversation between Socrates and his friend, Crito. The conversation is centered on the idea of justice, injustice and the appropriate response to injustice. Socrates, who has been imprisoned and sentenced to death based on false charges, believes that one should not respond to injustice with more injustice. So, while Socrates’ imprisonment was unjust, escaping would be unjust as well, because, by escaping, Socrates would be breaking the law. Crito presents Socrates with multiple reasons as to why he should escape from prison. However, after considering everything that Crito has to say, Socrates stands firm in his decision to remain in prison and accept his fate.
The first claim that Crito makes is that, if Socrates remains …show more content…
In Socrates’ case, it seems evident that his imprisonment, and thus his death sentence, is unjust. So, should he be obliged to follow this law and do nothing to prevent his sentence from being carried out? This dialogue confronts the distinction between morality and legality, and the fact that the two are not always one and the same. To say that all laws should always be followed, regardless of the circumstances, would be unjust. Socrates says that he will obey god before he obeys man, “let me follow the intimations of the will of God” (Plato, 37). which means that he will not betray his values and beliefs for the sake of obeying the state’s laws. Yet, Socrates still refuses to escape prison. This is because, although he may have violated the laws of the city for the purpose of remaining true to his beliefs, he cannot disobey the penalty imposed on him for defying said laws, because doing so would negate the laws and regulations of the city, which are the same laws and regulations that make it possible for humans to live as a civilized